Movies: Bombshell (Margot Robbie, Charlize Theron, Nicole Kidman)

[bleedblue1223]

It's very possible that Fox News gets absolutely crapped on during the movie. But again, if you're making a truly objective film, how can you not? Even outside of the abusive culture present within the company, the network still has major problems with delivering credible information and informed opinions in a way that goes beyond being a liberal or a conversative. A detached approach to Fox News still doesn't reflect well on the network.

That's not the point of the movie, at least from my understanding. This movie isn't meant to highlight Fox's issues with misinformation, but to be the takedown of Ailes and the Fox culture in regards to sexual assault. Maybe I'm wrong on the intent though. Robbie's and McKinnon's characters are fictional, so that's where the bash Fox angle will come from. Fox, CNN, and MSNBC are all equally bad on different aspects when it comes to pushing out misinformation. Each of the opinion anchors have had some horrible takes over the past few years.

 

[Kiwi]

With all the #metoo story's you could make a movie about The one they wanted to run with is the one that involves Fox news?

How isn't this movie about Weinstein? That guy was a sexual predator (allegedly) who worked with and was given cover by some of the most famous names in popular culture

You don't need to be a raging right winger to raise an eyebrow

 

[ORRFForever]

Laughing at their hypocriticalness in the same way at laughing at people that are anti-gay, who later turn out to be gay.

Yes. Thank you.

 

[ORRFForever]

With all the #metoo story's you could make a movie about The one they wanted to run with is the one that involves Fox news?

How isn't this movie about Weinstein? That guy was a sexual predator (allegedly) who worked with and was given cover by some of the most famous names in popular culture

You don't need to be a raging right winger to raise an eyebrow

Well said.

 

[Osprey]

For this to be on Spotlight level, which was a great movie, it needs to not have the appearance of political bias. Best way to do that is a movie that goes into not just Roger Ailes and Fox, but NBC and Matt Lauer, and Weinstein and the casting couch mentality in Hollywood. It's not like there isn't a lack of quality source material.

I agree that that would need to happen for it to be a great movie, but I think that there's still an avenue to make a merely good movie that's fair and not a smear of the network. The network isn't the villain in this saga, after all; Roger Ailes is. They're still responsible for it happening and him getting away with it, but they also did the right thing in the end by launching an investigation and forcing Ailes out. By choosing which to highlight, a movie could make the network look good, bad or neither. Like you, I'm cynical in suspecting that this movie is going to go with the "bad" option, but it's possible that it won't. Jay Roach also directed Recount (about the 2000 Presidential election) and Game Change (about the 2008 Presidential election), and though I haven't seen them, reviews seem to indicate that they're surprisingly fair to the Republicans depicted, so you never know.

 

[Jussi]

My skepticism comes squarely from Hollywood covering up for Weinstein for years for various reasons. It was the worst kept secret there, but they kept it from the public. I'm just afraid of them continuing to protect him and people that align with them. The whole story needs to be told as loudly and to as many people as possible.

One would think they 'd have to get the all the facts out and court cases settled before any movie is made, unless you want the movie to get in legal trouble. With Ailes that was done.

 

[bleedblue1223]

One would think they 'd have to get the all the facts out and court cases settled before any movie is made, unless you want the movie to get in legal trouble. With Ailes that was done.

I get that, that's why I'm just skeptical and not mad about it. I'm expecting Hollywood to protect him again though. Like the Catholic church, I'm sure all of that stuff is still happening in Hollywood.

 

[RandV]

Man some of you really need an outlet for this stuff, posting angry old man meme's on Facebook isn't enough?

For the other side part though I'm really not sure how you'd do a Weinstein movie, and outside a group of people wanting some petty revenge against 'Hollywood' would anyone really want to see it? Like Hollywood can take the Wolf of Wall Street or whatever bad guy and make them cool, but they're not going to be able to pull of a Jeffrey Espstein movie the same way. These types of stories are just completely demoralizing, and I didn't follow the Weinstein scandal that closely but it's hard to pin an entry point to have a good guy/bad guy/plot 2+ hour story. Unlike this movie where you have a specific entry point, cast of characters, and time frame to work with.

Also Weinstein while famous is still just a guy that made movies, not anywhere near as powerful or influential as Fox News and Roger Ailes. In terms of relevance you have last years Bush/Cheney movie is a level above the Fox/Ailes which is a level or two above Weinstein. Personally I didn't see it but I was interested in the Bush/Cheney movie (forgot the name), am neutral on Bombshell, but would have zero interest in seeing this theoretical Weinstein movie.

 

[bleedblue1223]

Man some of you really need an outlet for this stuff, posting angry old man meme's on Facebook isn't enough?

For the other side part though I'm really not sure how you'd do a Weinstein movie, and outside a group of people wanting some petty revenge against 'Hollywood' would anyone really want to see it? Like Hollywood can take the Wolf of Wall Street or whatever bad guy and make them cool, but they're not going to be able to pull of a Jeffrey Espstein movie the same way. These types of stories are just completely demoralizing, and I didn't follow the Weinstein scandal that closely but it's hard to pin an entry point to have a good guy/bad guy/plot 2+ hour story. Unlike this movie where you have a specific entry point, cast of characters, and time frame to work with.

Also Weinstein while famous is still just a guy that made movies, not anywhere near as powerful or influential as Fox News and Roger Ailes. In terms of relevance you have last years Bush/Cheney movie is a level above the Fox/Ailes which is a level or two above Weinstein. Personally I didn't see it but I was interested in the Bush/Cheney movie (forgot the name), am neutral on Bombshell, but would have zero interest in seeing this theoretical Weinstein movie.

A Weinstein movie would be about the sexual exploitation in Hollywood. Think spotlight, but focused on Hollywood instead of Catholic church. It's naive to think it's an isolated incident. You could use Weinstein or Franco or many others with the casting couch mentality.

 

[ORRFForever]

A Weinstein movie would be about the sexual exploitation in Hollywood. Think spotlight, but focused on Hollywood instead of Catholic church. It's naive to think it's an isolated incident. You could use Weinstein or Franco or many others with the casting couch mentality.

Yes. Guarantee more women have been exploited in Hollywood than anywhere else in North America. The scum of the scum. But, again, by making this movie, Hollywood can be holier than thou without looking in the mirror.

 

[Shockmaster]

Not saying it would all be false, but I feel like a Weinstein movie would be more interesting, Hollywood won't touch that one though.

I wonder if they would ever do a movie about all this stuff coming out from Lauer's time at NBC.

 

[bleedblue1223]

I wonder if they would ever do a movie about all this stuff coming out from Lauer's time at NBC.

I hope so. It's sad that people are call whataboutism for arguing that we need a quality metoo type movie on par with Spotlight. That movie includes both Fox, NBC/Lauer, Weinstein, and more that has yet to be released to public.

 

[bleedblue1223]

And politics of this movie shouldn't matter, it should just be about sexual exploitation of people in power. That problem is not isolated to one political side.

 

[izlez]

Didn't read the vast majority of this thread as I'm sure it's a dumpster fire.

I will point out that the one person that posted the most in here and is so against seeing the movie is the same guy that started a thread about "Good Boys" because he hated it so much, posted non-stop about how bad it looked and he hated Seth Rogan.... and then went on to see it opening weekend and liked it. So I'm sure he'll go see this one too

 

[bleedblue1223]

Didn't read the vast majority of this thread as I'm sure it's a dumpster fire.

I will point out that the one person that posted the most in here and is so against seeing the movie is the same guy that started a thread about "Good Boys" because he hated it so much, posted non-stop about how bad it looked and he hated Seth Rogan.... and then went on to see it opening weekend and liked it. So I'm sure he'll go see this one too

Yeah, if you like Superbad type comedy, you like Good Boys. I wouldn't say that's the movie to make the stand on Hollywood repeating itself. Dumb comedies have always repeated themselves.

 

[bleedblue1223]

Also, there's this thing called "legal process" going on regarding Weinstein; as for Lauer, he's a much, much smaller fish than Ailes.

Right, that's why I said the circumstances make it eaiser for the Ailes movie.

It's like people are ignoring how Hollywood already covered up and protected Weinstein. That's not some attack on the left or a conspiracy theory or whataboutism. You are missing the point with the Lauer part. It's naive to believe that he's the only one. We pretty much know Bill O'Reilly is guilty of that stuff too. It's about the power these people have and the sexual exploitation.

I'd be willing to bet, this stuff is as widespread as the Catholic priest sexual exploitation. That's the story that needs to be told. Not 1 specific individual or incident or network, but the entire culture as a whole. My skepticism is that we won't ever see that be done. We should all hope that type of MeToo movie gets made. That's why it's not about politics.

 

[bleedblue1223]

I'm not sure why that take of mine is some how causing controversy in here.

 

[MXD]

Right, that's why I said the circumstances make it eaiser for the Ailes movie.

It's like people are ignoring how Hollywood already covered up and protected Weinstein. That's not some attack on the left or a conspiracy theory or whataboutism. You are missing the point with the Lauer part. It's naive to believe that he's the only one. We pretty much know Bill O'Reilly is guilty of that stuff too. It's about the power these people have and the sexual exploitation.

I'd be willing to bet, this stuff is as widespread as the Catholic priest sexual exploitation. That's the story that needs to be told. Not 1 specific individual or incident or network, but the entire culture as a whole. My skepticism is that we won't ever see that be done. We should all hope that type of MeToo movie gets made. That's why it's not about politics.

(I've edited my post and added quite a bit to it).

As for this post -- and in bullet point format, since I gotta go :

- Weinstein WAS Hollywood, to a certain extent, so of course he got covered
- Of course Lauer isn't the only one, and probably indeed very akin to the Catholic Priest Scandals.
- And yeah, this is totally something that has to be told.
- I just think the potential earnings would be too important to pass up

 

[bleedblue1223]

(I've edited my post and added quite a bit to it).

As for this post -- and in bullet point format, since I gotta go :

- Weinstein WAS Hollywood, to a certain extent, so of course he got covered
- Of course Lauer isn't the only one, and probably indeed very akin to the Catholic Priest Scandals.
- And yeah, this is totally something that has to be told.
- I just think the potential earnings would be too important to pass up

Fair enough. I think my only point to this was there was no individual in Hollywood willing to out Weinstein at risk of their careers, but yes I agree Weinstein was extremely powerful and influential in that industry, which was the problem.

 

[Voight]

For this to be on Spotlight level, which was a great movie, it needs to not have the appearance of political bias. Best way to do that is a movie that goes into not just Roger Ailes and Fox, but NBC and Matt Lauer, and Weinstein and the casting couch mentality in Hollywood. It's not like there isn't a lack of quality source material.

Couldn't agree more. It is not a coincidence this movie was made after Fox divested itself of its movie studio and related assets. Comcast, who owns NBC, doesn't have a major film studio but they have DreamWorks so that may be part of the reason why not studio has or will make a movie about Lauer, at least for now.

My skepticism comes squarely from Hollywood covering up for Weinstein for years for various reasons. It was the worst kept secret there, but they kept it from the public. I'm just afraid of them continuing to protect him and people that align with them. The whole story needs to be told as loudly and to as many people as possible.

The problem is Hollywood still somewhat embraces Roman Polanski and hes just as despicable as Weinf***.

 

[Kiwi]

Couldn't agree more. Tho is not a coincidence this movie was made after Fox divested itself of its movie studio and related assets. Comcast, who owns NBC, doesn't have a major film studio but they have DreamWorks so that may be part of the reason why not audio has or will make a movie about Later, at least for now.



The problem is Hollywood still somewhat embraces Roman Polanski and hes just as despicable as Wein****.

Polanski might be worse if anything

He sexually violated a minor and was proven to be guilty, escaped justice by fleeing to Europe and now has people actively trying to rehabilitate his image and gets standing ovations at awards shows

That's bloody ugly on the face of it

 

[bleedblue1223]

What's controversial about it?

It's a far left industry that protected and covered for people that were predating on the venerable that are now making movies about there ideological enemies predating on the venerable

Excluding the hypocrisy nobody looks particularly good with this one

Political would've been the better word, but just wanted to make it more encompassing. I generally don't like talking politics on message boards, just how I usually don't like talking about The Last Jedi on message boards. Topics where there are very distinct sides and people dig their heels in.

 

[bleedblue1223]

Uh huh.
If your sticking and talking point is Weinstein and Polanski. Let me clue you in, no one and I mean no one supports those two ****ers. Weinstein is going to jail and eventually will be sued out of all his money, rightfully so. Taken down by the side you chide. Let the irony set in a little before you bring his name into this...again.

Polanski...that is a little more complicated. That guy escaped justice. He should be in jail. Does that satisfy you? However, you mentioned it as a Whataboutism and nothing more. It’s a cheap political talking point by you and VERY intellectually dishonest meant to deflect the real issue which is Fox News/Roger Ailies.

The rest of it. I don’t follow you, how da F do I know what you support or care about in threads I don’t read...like The Joker. I just know you are a deflector and whatabouter in this thread.

Plenty of people support Weinstein. Regular people like us don't, but people in Hollywood don't get credit for going against him when the covered and protected him for years and allowing women to be sexually exploited and assaulted for years. Hollywood should never be let off the hook for that. That's who people are calling out.

 

[Barnum]

Plenty of people support Weinstein. Regular people like us don't, but people in Hollywood don't get credit for going against him when the covered and protected him for years and allowing women to be sexually exploited and assaulted for years. Hollywood should never be let off the hook for that. That's who people are calling out.

get out here with that. It’s nonsense.

 

[Kiwi]

Uh huh.
If your sticking and talking point is Weinstein and Polanski. Let me clue you in, no one and I mean no one supports those two ****ers. Weinstein is going to jail and eventually will be sued out of all his money, rightfully so. Taken down by the side you chide. Let the irony set in a little before you bring his name into this...again.

Polanski...that is a little more complicated. That guy escaped justice. He should be in jail. Does that satisfy you? However, you mentioned it as a Whataboutism and nothing more. It’s a cheap political talking point by you and VERY intellectually dishonest meant to deflect the real issue which is Fox News/Roger Ailies.

The rest of it. I don’t follow you, how da F do I know what you support or care about in threads I don’t read...like The Joker. I just know you are a deflector and whatabouter in this thread.

They don't? Why is Polanski still working and why did people turn a blind eye to what Weinstein was up to? I'd describe that as a tactile endorsement of that behavior

I'm not chiding anybody, the left and the right are guilty of this you hack

Complicated? He's a convicted child molester and he fled justice, I don't find it that complicated if I'm being honest but what I don't like is people are lining up to work with him and he got a standing ovation at the Academy awards

I find that abhorrent, just like I find Ailes abhorrent, just like I find Weinstein abhorrent

Now explain to me why I'm lauding Hollywood who seem to be more than happy to accept sexual abuse when it suits them again?

You accused me of a dishonest statement with zero evidence then? It would seem somebody is telling lies